Under a DACA amnesty, American taxpayers would be left with a $26 billion bill. About one in five DACA illegal aliens, after an amnesty, would end up on food stamps, while at least one in seven would go on Medicaid. Since DACA’s inception under Obama, more than 2,100 illegal aliens have been kicked off the program after it was revealed that they were either criminals or gang members. JOHN BINDER

Saturday, June 3, 2017

President Obama
“weaponized” the agencies of our government to advance his leftist agenda both
at home and abroad. Little reporting was done regarding his funneling of
tax dollars to an organization run by George Soros that sought to impose
left-leaning policies on other nations. We’re in the lead in shedding
some light on that misdeed.

We sued last week here in DC after both State and USAID failed to respond to
our requests for:

All
records relating to any contracts, grants or other
allocations/disbursements of funds by the State Department (USAID) to the
Foundation Open Society-Albania (FOSA) and/or its personnel and/or any
FOSA subsidiaries. Such records shall include, but is not be limited to
proposals, contracts, requests for funding, payment authorizations,
invoices, and similar budget records, as well as any and all related
records of communication between State Department officials, employees, or
representatives and officials, employees, or representative of the U.S.
Agency for International Development.

All
records of communication between any officials, employees or
representatives of the State Department (USAID), including but not limited
to U.S. Ambassador Donald Lu, and any officials, employees or
representatives of Foundation Open Society-Albania, its subsidiaries
and/or affiliated organizations.

All
assessments, evaluations, reports or similar records relating to the work
of Foundation Open Society-Albania and/or its subsidiaries or affiliated
organizations.

All
records of communications transmitted via the State Department’s SMART
system sent to or from any employee of the U.S. Government operating under
the authority of the Chief of Mission in Tirana that pertain to Foundation
Open Society-Albania, its subsidiaries and/or affiliated
organizations.

In a March 14, 2017, letter to Secretary
of State Rex W. Tillerson, six U.S. Senators (Sens. Lee (R-UT), Inhofe (R-OK),
Tillis (R-NC), Cruz (R-TX), Perdue (R-GA) and Cassidy (R-LA)) called on the
secretary to investigate the relations between USAID and the Soros Foundations
and how U.S. tax dollars are being used by the State Department and the USAID
to support left-of-center political groups who seek to impose left-leaning
policies in countries such as Macedonia and Albania.

In the letter, the senators reference USAID funding of Soros activities in
Macedonia and then cite similar activities in Albania:

Much of the concerning activity in Macedonia has been
perpetuated through USAID funds awarded to implement in entities such as George
Soros’ Open Society Foundations. As the recipient of multiple grant awards and
serving as a USAID contractor implementing projects in this small nation of 2.1
million people, our taxpayer funded foreign aid goes far, allowing Foundation
Open Society-Macedonia (FOSM) to push a progressive agenda and invigorate the
political left…

This problem is not limited to Macedonia, but appears to follow a pattern of
alarming activity in this volatile region. Respected leaders from Albania have
made similar claims of US diplomats and Soros-backed organizations pushing for
certain political outcomes in their country. Foundation Open Society-Albania
(FOSA) and its experts, with funding from USAID, have created the controversial
Strategy Document for Albanian Judicial Reform. Some leaders believe that these
“reforms” are ultimately aimed to give the Prime Minister and left-of-center
government full control over judiciary power.

Soros’ association with the
State Department in Albania goes back at least to 2011 when Soros urged Hillary
Clinton to take action in Albania over recent demonstrations in the capital of
Tirana. Fox Newsreported on August
17, 2016, that:

Newly leaked emails and other files from billionaire George
Soros’ web of organizations are shedding light on the liberal powerbroker’s
extensive influence in political and diplomatic affairs.

One email chain shows the Wall Street titan in 2011 personally wrote
then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, urging intervention in Albania’s
political unrest. Within days, an envoy he recommended was dispatched to the
region.

In May 2016, USAID announced that
it was providing $9 million for the “Justice for All” project in Albania “to
improve the performance of Albanian courts by introducing comprehensive
judicial standards for efficiency, transparency, accessibility, and
accountability.” According to the announcement, the project “will
be implemented by USAID Contractor East-West Management Institute” (EWMI).
According to EWMI’s 2011 financial report,
it has received funding from the Soros Economic Development Fund: “loans … of
up to $1,000,000.”

This is our second FOIA lawsuit to uncover the truth about the scandal of the
Obama administration’s siphoning of tax dollars to the Soros operations in
Europe. We expect the Trump administration to finally let the sunlight in on
this gross politicization of our tax dollars.

The U.S. government has
quietly spent millions of taxpayer dollars to destabilize the democratically
elected, center-right government in Macedonia by colluding with leftwing
billionaire philanthropist George Soros, records obtained by Judicial Watch
show. Barack Obama’s U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia, Jess L. Baily, has
worked behind the scenes with Soros’ Open Society Foundation to funnel large
sums of American dollars for the cause, constituting an interference of the
U.S. Ambassador in domestic political affairs in violation of the Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

***

Here’s how the clandestine operation functions, according to
high-level sources in Macedonia and the U.S. that have provided Judicial Watch
with records as part of an ongoing investigation. The Open Society Foundation
has established and funded dozens of leftwing, nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs) in Macedonia to overthrow the conservative government. One Macedonian
government official interviewed by Judicial Watch in Washington D.C. recently,
calls it the “Soros infantry.” The groups organize youth movements, create
influential media outlets and organize violent protests to undermine the
institutions and policies implemented by the government. One of the Soros’
groups funded the translation and publication of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for
Radicals” into Macedonian. The book is a tactical manual of subversion,
provides direct advice for radical street protests and proclaims Lucifer to be
the first radical. Thanks to Obama’s ambassador, who has not been replaced by
President Trump, Uncle Sam keeps the money flowing so the groups can continue
operating and recruiting, sources in Macedonia and the U.S. confirm.

I’ll be sure to report to
you as appropriate if and when we finally get documents on this scandal (I
worry the money is still flowing—even under the Trump administration).

THE SINS OF THE FATHERS: THEIR GLOBAL LOOTING of the
POOR

THE OPEN BORDERS PARTY of GEORGE SOROS, HILLARY
& BILLARY CLINTON, BARACK OBAMA and DONALD TRUMP

THE OBAMA AND THE REVOLUTION: Will His Bid For A Third Term For Life Come
About? Will Illegals Vote the La Raza Supremacist Back Into the White House?

DESTROY AMERICA TO BUILD A MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP WHERE LA RAZA
MEXICANS VOTE HIM PRESIDENT FOR LIFE

"He is intent on maximizing the damage he inflicted on
the country during the two terms of his faux presidency, having now
set up shop in Washington to pursue a post-presidency agenda advancing a
left-wing insurgency, civil unrest, racial
conflict and the destabilizing activities of a shadow."

The American oligarchy, steeped in
criminality and parasitism, can produce only a government of war, social
reaction and repression. In its blind avarice, it is creating the conditions
for unprecedented social upheavals. It is hurtling toward its own revolutionary
demise at the hands of the working class.

BUT WE KNOW WHERE THEY LIVE!

“The massive transfer
of wealth will not go to investment, but to acquiring bigger

diamonds; more
luxurious mansions, yachts and private jets; new private

islands; more security
guards and better-protected gated communities to

segregate the
financial nobility from the masses whom they despise

and fear.”

*

“Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike,

has become a
kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes.

This is the way a
great country is raided by its elite.” ---- Karen

McQuillan AMERICAN
THINKER.com

BARACK OBAMA PLANS A THIRD TERM: HIS CRONY BANKSTERS, LA RAZA, MUSLIMS
AND THOSE MUSLIM DICTATORSHIPS HE FUNDED ARE BEHIND HIM…. Along with George
Soros!

THE OBAMA COUP TO BE DICTATOR:

THE ARMY OF ILLEGALS TO BRING
AMERICA DOWN AND FORM THE OBAMA MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP THAT WILL BE OPEN
BORDERS AND PRO LA RAZA FASCIST SUPREMACY.

Daniel Greenfield, the award-winning Shillman
Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, believes (OBAMA'S POLITICAL PARTY)
“OFA will be far more dangerous in the wild than the Clinton Foundation ever
was.”

*

“Barack
Obama and his henchmen would not have been emboldened in their

ostensible
machinations to undermine an election and then a presidency if

it were
not for the fecklessness of the Republican Party and the blind eye as
well

as the
tacit support of the mainstream media.”

BARACK OBAMA PLANS A THIRD TERM: HIS CRONY BANKSTERS, LA RAZA, MUSLIMS
AND THOSE MUSLIM DICTATORSHIPS HE FUNDED ARE BEHIND HIM…. Along with George
Soros!

THE OBAMA COUP TO BE DICTATOR:

THE ARMY OF ILLEGALS TO BRING
AMERICA DOWN AND FORM THE OBAMA MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP THAT WILL BE OPEN
BORDERS AND PRO LA RAZA FASCIST SUPREMACY.

Daniel Greenfield, the award-winning Shillman
Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, believes (OBAMA'S POLITICAL PARTY)
“OFA will be far more dangerous in the wild than the Clinton Foundation ever
was.”

*

“Barack
Obama and his henchmen would not have been emboldened in their

ostensible
machinations to undermine an election and then a presidency if

it were
not for the fecklessness of the Republican Party and the blind eye as
well

as the
tacit support of the mainstream media.”

*

(TOP) OBAMA ALL 5-17

THE LEGACY OF
BARACK OBAMA:

Final Death of the American White Middle Class

Under the
Obama administration, more Americans have found themselves consigned to
economic ghettos, living in neighborhoods where more than 40 percent subsist
below the poverty level.

*

Millions more now live in “high poverty” districts
of 20-40 percent poverty, according to recently released report by the
Brookings Institution.

THE OBAMA BOOK DEAL: Sixty-five million dollars—or even $267.5
million—is a small price to pay for the contribution the former president made
to enriching the already fabulously rich, defending the American ruling elite’s
geopolitical interests around the world and continuing the assault on the
wages, benefits and living standards of the working class.

Americans die young, poor and addicted while politicians
angle for more amnesty and wider open borders with the LA RAZA cartels.

L.A. City Council backs plan to borrow $60 million to pay off legal settlements

City Controller Ron Galperin, seen at microphone with other city leaders in 2015, opposes a plan to borrow $60 million to cover the cost of legal settlements and court judgments. (Ricardo DeAratanha / Los Angeles Times)

The Los Angeles City Council took a step Tuesday toward borrowing up to $60 million to pay for legal payouts and court judgments despite a warning by City Controller Ron Galperin that the borrowing proposal is costly and unnecessary.

The council voted 13 to 1 to proceed with the borrowing plan. A separate vote on the bond contract is expected later this year.

The city normally budgets about $60 million annually for its legal liability fund. But budget officials say they’ve already spent $135 million on legal settlements and court judgments this fiscal year, forcing the city to dip into its reserve fund, which pays for emergencies.

Borrowing the $60 million will cost the city $20 million in interest, budget officials said.

Councilman Mitch Englander, a persistent critic of the borrowing plan, voted against it Tuesday.

Councilman Paul Krekorian also voiced opposition, but said he supports the plan as an option to ensure the city doesn’t have to dip further into its reserve fund.

The last time L.A. issued such a bond was 2010 after the city was forced to pay millions of dollars to settle lawsuits over excessive force by police at a May Day demonstration at MacArthur Park in 2007.

That 2010 bond also helped pay for other court cases.

Galperin warned city leaders against proceeding with the bond in a letter this month. His office maintains the city’s finances will improve by the end of the fiscal year, when $38 million in unspent city money will be returned by departments.

“I continue to believe that it is unwise for a city to use bonds as a way to bridge a budget gap,” Galperin said in a statement after the vote.

With a final vote still pending on the bond contract, the City Council could still back out of the plan.

US Supreme Court sides with police who broke into home and shot sleeping couple

By Shelley Connor2 June 2017

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled unanimously on Tuesday in favor of the police in a case involving Constitutional issues relating to an illegal search and entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment which resulted in a man and his pregnant wife being shot 15 times.

The 8-0 decision in County of Los Angeles vs. Mendez overturns a Ninth Circuit Court decision that found in favor of Angel Mendez and vacated an award of $4 million granted by the Ninth Circuit.

Notably, the court reached its unanimous decision without the input of the conservative Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch, who did not vote since arguments in the case were heard before he was sworn in earlier this year.

On October 1, 2010, 12 Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputies, acting upon the word of an informant, made plans to sweep the home of Paula Hughes in the town of Lancaster in search of an at-large parolee. Deputies were told that a man and a “pregnant lady” were living in a plywood structure in Hughes’ backyard. The deputies did not notify Hughes of the sweep; they had not obtained a search warrant, nor had Hughes given them permission to search her property.

Conley and Jennifer Pederson, were assigned to clear the back of the property. Conley and Pederson made note of the plywood shack. A power cord ran from Hughes’ house to the 343 square foot structure. Clothes hung outside and the shack was equipped with an air conditioning unit—all things that signaled that the shed-like structure was inhabited.

Neither Pederson nor Conley knocked on the door of the shack, nor announced their presence. Conley opened the door and pulled aside a blanket which had been hung over the door for insulation.

Angel Mendez and his wife, Jennifer, who was seven months pregnant, lay asleep in the shack. Hughes had allowed them to live in the shed until they could recover from financial hardship. As deputies entered the structure, Angel woke and made to stand up, attempting to put down the BB gun he kept close to shoot at rats.

“Gun!” Conley shouted; he and Pederson then

shot Mendez and his slumbering wife 15 times.

Angel Mendez was severely wounded and ended

up losing most of his right leg. Jennifer Mendez

was shot in the back and sustained a shattered

collarbone.

The Mendezes sued Los Angeles County in federal court on the grounds that the deputies had violated their Fourth Amendment rights against illegal search and seizure and excessive force. The court ruled in their behalf, noting that the deputies were well aware that the shack was inhabited, having been informed of the fact in briefings and having seen evidence of habitation around the outside of the shed. Moreover, the deputies’ search did not merit any exception for a warrantless search, and they had further violated the Fourth Amendment by failing to alert the couple of their presence.

The court awarded the Mendezes $4 million in damages for the shooting, as well as attorneys’ fees and two penalties for unreasonable search and seizure. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court concurred with the lower court with the exception of the so-called “knock and announce” Fourth Amendment penalty.

Invoking the so-called “provocation doctrine,” the Ninth Circuit ruled that Pederson and Conley’s unreasonable entry into the Mendez’s shelter had provoked a “violent response” from Mendez and his BB gun.

Los Angeles County petitioned for a review of the case by the Supreme Court which subsequently heard arguments on March 22. Justice Sonia Sotomayor initially noted that the Mendezes had a Second Amendment right to bear arms, and so police should expect to be confronted by armed homeowners in the course of an illegal entry. Justice Elena Kagan made similar arguments.

Nevertheless, the court handed down a unanimous decision affirming the court’s hostility to the provocation doctrine as expressed in City and County of San Francisco v. Sheehan where the court upheld the concept of “qualified immunity” for officers who had provoked a violent confrontation with a mentally ill woman and shot her.

In the Mendez decision, Justice Samuel Alito called the provocation rule “a novel and unsupported path to liability in cases in which the use of force was reasonable.”

The court vacated the damages awarded by the court, sending the case back to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to reconsider whether the Mendezes can be awarded damages strictly on the merits of the warrantless entry; the court will not be allowed to consider the issues of police provocation or excessive force.

Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) has a history rife with abuse and brutality. In a state that jealously guards the opacity of police records, the LASD stands as one of the most protective of its officers.

Last June, in response to threats from the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (ALADS), a union representing LASD deputies, the LASD removed from its public information database all information on investigations into police shootings, except for racial information.

The ALADS union tenaciously fights transparency or accountability; it currently is working to keep the Sheriff from releasing to prosecutors the names of deputies who have had disciplinary actions or who have been charged with crimes.

The crimes of the LASD and other police forces in Los Angeles County have abounded. Between 2000 and 2016, at least 1,300 people in the county were shot by police. A study published in the Guardian revealed that, per capita, Los Angeles County was the 11th deadliest county in the United States for police shootings in 2015. Very seldom were officers charged in these shootings.

The Supreme Court has legitimized this criminal violence with one reactionary ruling after another. It frequently invokes the reactionary “qualified immunity” doctrine that limits remedies for excessive force.

The right-wing judges did not stand up for the Second Amendment right to bear arms that is so frequently thrown out as a bone by right-wing politicians. The liberal judges, meanwhile, assented to the reactionary ruling, ultimately forsaking Fourth Amendment rights for the right of police to shoot and maim without any significant restrictions.

John Burton, president of the board of directors of the National Police Accountability Project and WSWS writer, noted the Mendez decision was part of a definite trend and “another stone removed from the edifice of Fourth Amendment rights.”

“The whole thing is political,” he told the WSWS. “The courts want to empower the police as much as possible and limit access to remedies for police violence.”

The important questions in the Mendez case, he pointed out, are not those of jurisprudence or democratic ideals enshrined in the Bill of Rights, but those of class tensions. Such decisions allow constitutional protections to be taken away “piece by piece, instead of all at once.”

An assault by an LAPD officer led to a criminal conviction — and now, a $500,000 settlement

An image from a 2014 surveillance video shows officers surrounding a man on the ground in South Los Angeles. (Los Angeles County Superior Court)

The Los Angeles City Council agreed Wednesday to pay up to $500,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by a man assaulted by a police officer in South Los Angeles, an arrest caught on video that resulted in a rare criminal conviction — but no jail time — for the officer.

In a 12-0 vote, city lawmakers agreed to close the books on a federal civil rights case brought by Clinton Alford, who was kicked, punched and elbowed by an officer during a 2014 arrest.

The settlement marks the financial fallout of a case that echoed the larger national debate about how police use force: a black man, assaulted by an officer, recorded on video. The officer’s actions were criticized by many police officials, particularly after seeing the footage captured by a nearby security camera.

Prosecutors charged LAPD Officer Richard Garcia with assault under the color of authority, a felony that could have landed him behind bars for up to three years.

But Garcia was spared from jail last week under a controversial deal made with prosecutors. After completing community service, following all laws, staying away from Alford and donating $500 to a charity, Garcia was allowed to plead no contest to a misdemeanor charge that replaced the felony.

Garcia was sentenced to serve two years of probation. The punishment was less severe than that recommended by a probation officer, who suggested in a report filed in court that Garcia spend a year in jail and three years on probation.

Officers initially tried to stop Alford in October 2014 because police were investigating a robbery and he matched the description of the suspect, authorities said. After the assault, Alford was booked on suspicion of drug possession and resisting arrest — a case prosecutors later dismissed.

The 25-year-old is now facing life in prison after a jury convicted him a few weeks ago in a separate 2015 case. The charges in that case included rape, kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon, according to court records.

Garcia is still employed by the Los Angeles Police Department, but is on unpaid leave awaiting a disciplinary hearing. LAPD Chief Charlie Beck noted last week that the hearing could result in his firing.

The City Council also unanimously agreed Wednesday to pay up to $500,000 to settle another lawsuit from a man who said he was permanently injured in 2013 after he was shot by officers and bitten by a police dog in South L.A.

The Police Commission, the civilian panel that oversees the LAPD, agreed with Beck that police were justified in firing their guns at Sergio Pina. Officers told investigators they saw the 37-year-old man point a gun at one of the officers as they searched a neighborhood for him, according to a summary of the commission’s decision.

No gun was found at the scene, but the board said a “preponderance of the evidence” supported the officers’ account that Pina was armed. Both the commission’s report and another report from Beck noted that police went to the neighborhood because someone called 911 reporting a man walking around with a gun. Beck’s report said Pina matched the description of the man.

Pina contested the idea that he had a gun in two lawsuits he later filed, saying he was unarmed at the time of the shooting.

”We are pleased with the settlement because it was what the client wanted,” said Dale Galipo, an attorney who is representing Pina. “However, we felt we could prevail on the case had we gone to trial.”

The settlements were the latest in a string of police-related payouts that have captured the attention of City Hall, particularly as lawmakers took steps toward a controversial plan to borrow up to $60 million to help pay a skyrocketing legal tab.

Not all of the city’s costly settlements involved the LAPD. In August, for example, the council agreed to pay roughly $200 million to settle a lawsuit brought by disability rights groups over the lack of accessible publicly funded housing.

But LAPD-related lawsuits have taken a toll on the city’s coffers. During the last fiscal year, the city paid almost $81 million to settle such cases, a sharp increase from recent years, driven by high-dollar settlements for two wrongful murder convictions and a police shooting that left a boy paralyzed.

The city has paid over $32 million for LAPD-related legal cases during this fiscal year, which ends June 30, a spokesman for the city attorney’s office said Wednesday.

Councilman Mitch Englander, chairman of the Public Safety Committee, said in a statement that he was “very concerned with the current trend of rising payouts.”

Englander noted that many of the settlements stemmed from encounters that predated the Police Commission’s renewed efforts to minimize when officers use serious force — changes that have included revamped training, new protocols and more technology.

“I will be looking closely at the implementation of these reforms to observe any measurable effect they have in halting or reversing this trend,” he said.

EVERY WEEK THUG L.A. COPS AND SHERIFFS MURDER AT LEAST TWO PEOPLE

Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department

(LASD) has a history rife with abuse and

brutality. In a state that jealously guards the

opacity of police records, the LASD stands as one

of the most protective of its officers.

“Gun!” Conley shouted; he and Pederson then

shot Mendez and his slumbering wife 15 times.

Angel Mendez was severely wounded and ended

up losing most of his right leg. Jennifer Mendez

was shot in the back and sustained a shattered

collarbone.

US Supreme Court sides with police who broke into home and shot sleeping couple

By Shelley Connor2 June 2017

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled unanimously on Tuesday in favor of the police in a case involving Constitutional issues relating to an illegal search and entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment which resulted in a man and his pregnant wife being shot 15 times.

The 8-0 decision in County of Los Angeles vs. Mendez overturns a Ninth Circuit Court decision that found in favor of Angel Mendez and vacated an award of $4 million granted by the Ninth Circuit.

Notably, the court reached its unanimous decision without the input of the conservative Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch, who did not vote since arguments in the case were heard before he was sworn in earlier this year.

On October 1, 2010, 12 Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputies, acting upon the word of an informant, made plans to sweep the home of Paula Hughes in the town of Lancaster in search of an at-large parolee. Deputies were told that a man and a “pregnant lady” were living in a plywood structure in Hughes’ backyard. The deputies did not notify Hughes of the sweep; they had not obtained a search warrant, nor had Hughes given them permission to search her property.

Conley and Jennifer Pederson, were assigned to clear the back of the property. Conley and Pederson made note of the plywood shack. A power cord ran from Hughes’ house to the 343 square foot structure. Clothes hung outside and the shack was equipped with an air conditioning unit—all things that signaled that the shed-like structure was inhabited.

Neither Pederson nor Conley knocked on the door of the shack, nor announced their presence. Conley opened the door and pulled aside a blanket which had been hung over the door for insulation.

Angel Mendez and his wife, Jennifer, who was seven months pregnant, lay asleep in the shack. Hughes had allowed them to live in the shed until they could recover from financial hardship. As deputies entered the structure, Angel woke and made to stand up, attempting to put down the BB gun he kept close to shoot at rats.

“Gun!” Conley shouted; he and Pederson then

shot Mendez and his slumbering wife 15 times.

Angel Mendez was severely wounded and ended

up losing most of his right leg. Jennifer Mendez

was shot in the back and sustained a shattered

collarbone.

The Mendezes sued Los Angeles County in federal court on the grounds that the deputies had violated their Fourth Amendment rights against illegal search and seizure and excessive force. The court ruled in their behalf, noting that the deputies were well aware that the shack was inhabited, having been informed of the fact in briefings and having seen evidence of habitation around the outside of the shed. Moreover, the deputies’ search did not merit any exception for a warrantless search, and they had further violated the Fourth Amendment by failing to alert the couple of their presence.

The court awarded the Mendezes $4 million in damages for the shooting, as well as attorneys’ fees and two penalties for unreasonable search and seizure. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court concurred with the lower court with the exception of the so-called “knock and announce” Fourth Amendment penalty.

Invoking the so-called “provocation doctrine,” the Ninth Circuit ruled that Pederson and Conley’s unreasonable entry into the Mendez’s shelter had provoked a “violent response” from Mendez and his BB gun.

Los Angeles County petitioned for a review of the case by the Supreme Court which subsequently heard arguments on March 22. Justice Sonia Sotomayor initially noted that the Mendezes had a Second Amendment right to bear arms, and so police should expect to be confronted by armed homeowners in the course of an illegal entry. Justice Elena Kagan made similar arguments.

Nevertheless, the court handed down a unanimous decision affirming the court’s hostility to the provocation doctrine as expressed in City and County of San Francisco v. Sheehan where the court upheld the concept of “qualified immunity” for officers who had provoked a violent confrontation with a mentally ill woman and shot her.

In the Mendez decision, Justice Samuel Alito called the provocation rule “a novel and unsupported path to liability in cases in which the use of force was reasonable.”

The court vacated the damages awarded by the court, sending the case back to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to reconsider whether the Mendezes can be awarded damages strictly on the merits of the warrantless entry; the court will not be allowed to consider the issues of police provocation or excessive force.

Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) has a history rife with abuse and brutality. In a state that jealously guards the opacity of police records, the LASD stands as one of the most protective of its officers.

Last June, in response to threats from the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (ALADS), a union representing LASD deputies, the LASD removed from its public information database all information on investigations into police shootings, except for racial information.

The ALADS union tenaciously fights transparency or accountability; it currently is working to keep the Sheriff from releasing to prosecutors the names of deputies who have had disciplinary actions or who have been charged with crimes.

The crimes of the LASD and other police forces in Los Angeles County have abounded. Between 2000 and 2016, at least 1,300 people in the county were shot by police. A study published in the Guardian revealed that, per capita, Los Angeles County was the 11th deadliest county in the United States for police shootings in 2015. Very seldom were officers charged in these shootings.

The Supreme Court has legitimized this criminal violence with one reactionary ruling after another. It frequently invokes the reactionary “qualified immunity” doctrine that limits remedies for excessive force.

The right-wing judges did not stand up for the Second Amendment right to bear arms that is so frequently thrown out as a bone by right-wing politicians. The liberal judges, meanwhile, assented to the reactionary ruling, ultimately forsaking Fourth Amendment rights for the right of police to shoot and maim without any significant restrictions.

John Burton, president of the board of directors of the National Police Accountability Project and WSWS writer, noted the Mendez decision was part of a definite trend and “another stone removed from the edifice of Fourth Amendment rights.”

“The whole thing is political,” he told the WSWS. “The courts want to empower the police as much as possible and limit access to remedies for police violence.”

The important questions in the Mendez case, he pointed out, are not those of jurisprudence or democratic ideals enshrined in the Bill of Rights, but those of class tensions. Such decisions allow constitutional protections to be taken away “piece by piece, instead of all at once.”

An assault by an LAPD officer led to a criminal conviction — and now, a $500,000 settlement

An image from a 2014 surveillance video shows officers surrounding a man on the ground in South Los Angeles. (Los Angeles County Superior Court)

The Los Angeles City Council agreed Wednesday to pay up to $500,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by a man assaulted by a police officer in South Los Angeles, an arrest caught on video that resulted in a rare criminal conviction — but no jail time — for the officer.

In a 12-0 vote, city lawmakers agreed to close the books on a federal civil rights case brought by Clinton Alford, who was kicked, punched and elbowed by an officer during a 2014 arrest.

The settlement marks the financial fallout of a case that echoed the larger national debate about how police use force: a black man, assaulted by an officer, recorded on video. The officer’s actions were criticized by many police officials, particularly after seeing the footage captured by a nearby security camera.

Prosecutors charged LAPD Officer Richard Garcia with assault under the color of authority, a felony that could have landed him behind bars for up to three years.

But Garcia was spared from jail last week under a controversial deal made with prosecutors. After completing community service, following all laws, staying away from Alford and donating $500 to a charity, Garcia was allowed to plead no contest to a misdemeanor charge that replaced the felony.

Garcia was sentenced to serve two years of probation. The punishment was less severe than that recommended by a probation officer, who suggested in a report filed in court that Garcia spend a year in jail and three years on probation.

Officers initially tried to stop Alford in October 2014 because police were investigating a robbery and he matched the description of the suspect, authorities said. After the assault, Alford was booked on suspicion of drug possession and resisting arrest — a case prosecutors later dismissed.

The 25-year-old is now facing life in prison after a jury convicted him a few weeks ago in a separate 2015 case. The charges in that case included rape, kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon, according to court records.

Garcia is still employed by the Los Angeles Police Department, but is on unpaid leave awaiting a disciplinary hearing. LAPD Chief Charlie Beck noted last week that the hearing could result in his firing.

The City Council also unanimously agreed Wednesday to pay up to $500,000 to settle another lawsuit from a man who said he was permanently injured in 2013 after he was shot by officers and bitten by a police dog in South L.A.

The Police Commission, the civilian panel that oversees the LAPD, agreed with Beck that police were justified in firing their guns at Sergio Pina. Officers told investigators they saw the 37-year-old man point a gun at one of the officers as they searched a neighborhood for him, according to a summary of the commission’s decision.

No gun was found at the scene, but the board said a “preponderance of the evidence” supported the officers’ account that Pina was armed. Both the commission’s report and another report from Beck noted that police went to the neighborhood because someone called 911 reporting a man walking around with a gun. Beck’s report said Pina matched the description of the man.

Pina contested the idea that he had a gun in two lawsuits he later filed, saying he was unarmed at the time of the shooting.

”We are pleased with the settlement because it was what the client wanted,” said Dale Galipo, an attorney who is representing Pina. “However, we felt we could prevail on the case had we gone to trial.”

The settlements were the latest in a string of police-related payouts that have captured the attention of City Hall, particularly as lawmakers took steps toward a controversial plan to borrow up to $60 million to help pay a skyrocketing legal tab.

Not all of the city’s costly settlements involved the LAPD. In August, for example, the council agreed to pay roughly $200 million to settle a lawsuit brought by disability rights groups over the lack of accessible publicly funded housing.

But LAPD-related lawsuits have taken a toll on the city’s coffers. During the last fiscal year, the city paid almost $81 million to settle such cases, a sharp increase from recent years, driven by high-dollar settlements for two wrongful murder convictions and a police shooting that left a boy paralyzed.

The city has paid over $32 million for LAPD-related legal cases during this fiscal year, which ends June 30, a spokesman for the city attorney’s office said Wednesday.

Councilman Mitch Englander, chairman of the Public Safety Committee, said in a statement that he was “very concerned with the current trend of rising payouts.”

Englander noted that many of the settlements stemmed from encounters that predated the Police Commission’s renewed efforts to minimize when officers use serious force — changes that have included revamped training, new protocols and more technology.

“I will be looking closely at the implementation of these reforms to observe any measurable effect they have in halting or reversing this trend,” he said.